STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION DOCKET NO. E-7, SUB 790

Transcription

1 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION DOCKET NO. E-7, SUB 790 BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION In the Matter of ) MOTION FOR Application of Duke Energy Corporation for ) POSTPONEMENT BY THE Approval of an Electric Generation Certificate ) ) NORTH CAROLINA WASTE of Public Convenience and Necessity to ) AWARENESS AND Construct Two 800 MW State of the Art Coal ) REDUCTION NETWORK Units for Cliffside Project ) PURSUANT TO NCUC Rule R1-7(a)(5), now comes the North Carolina Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, Inc. ( NCWARN ), through the undersigned attorney, with a motion for a postponement for the hearing in this docket until a suitable time after the 2005 Integrated Resource Plans ( IRPs ) are approved and other initiatives currently underway provide the necessary data and analysis for the Commission to make its determination. This motion supports and supplements the earlier motion filed by the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy ("SACE") to extend the deadline for filing comments and to postpone the evidentiary hearing. In support of this motion, NCWARN states: 1. In its application for a certificate of convenience and necessity, Duke Power relies substantially on the IRP it filed in Docket No. E-100, Sub 103. To date, the parties have filed briefs and/or proposed orders in that docket, but the Commission has not issued an order. Any changes to the plans or changes to the methodology to those plans could have a significant role in determining the need for two new baseload units. -1-

2 2. At the evidentiary hearing in the 2005 IRP docket, witnesses for Duke Power described the utility s rigorous research effort into what was characterized as scores of DSM programs. The witnesses also described the screening tests and other criteria they were using to characterize those programs, but it should be noted that the tests, such as the rate impact test, have had the effect of eliminating many of the efficiency programs. NCWARN and the other public interest intervenors believe that efficiency programs, if administered in the public interest by a qualified party, could displace the need for the new generation units. Consideration of the "public convenience and necessity" of the proposed 1600 MW coal units cannot be assessed until the Commission fully examines the results of these studies. 3. It was established in the 2005 IRP proceedings that the two Cliffside units will cost approximately $2 billion. Duke Power s 2005 IRP does not even attempt to come up with energy efficiency programs that could be funded by that amount of ratepayer funds. In general terms, this amount of funding would yield $200 million each year for a decade, and would clearly go a long way to reduce the need for the coal units. As extremely relevant to the issuance of the certificate, case law points out that the IRP statute s purpose is to prevent costly overbuilding. State ex. rel Utils. Comm n v. High Rock Lake Ass n, 37 NC App. 138, 245 ks.e.2d 787, cert. denied, 295 N.C. 646, 248 S.E.2d 257 (1978). 4. As part of the 2005 IRP proceedings, the Commission set up a working group of the parties to discuss several issues. Resolution of the workshop issues, i.e., the criteria for assessing DSM programs, expanding the review in the IRP proceedings, -2-

3 ratemaking issues, carbon regulation, and renewable portfolio standards and public benefit funds, will have a significant impact on any determination of the need for these plants. 5. The Commission has recently funded a study to determine the amount of energy efficiency in the State to provide the baseline for establishing a renewable portfolio standard. The study is on schedule to be completed by early December 2006 and will likely be presented to the Environmental Review Commission at its January 2007 meeting and to the Utilities Commission around the same time period. 6. Since the 2005 IRPs were filed, Duke Power has adopted the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency ( NAPEE ) as an important tool for putting energy efficiency in its rightful place as a cornerstone of U.S. energy policy. The Action Plan was introduced by Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy and member of the Board of Directors of the Alliance to Save Energy Board of Directors, at the July 31, 2006, meeting of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners ( NARUC"). The Alliance to Save Energy stated that its efforts would defer the need for 40 new 500-megawatt power plants, avoid greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to those of more than 35 million vehicles, lower the cost of air pollution controls, and reduce demand for natural gas sufficiently to bring down prices if fully implemented. The utilities have stated that NAPEE will be used as a roadmap for action in the recently-formed Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance, which is organized to advance energy efficiency in the 11-state, southeastern region of the United States, including North Carolina. 7. As an additional argument why postponing the Commission s hearing will not -3-

4 put an unreasonable burden on Duke Power, it should be noted that Duke Power applied last year to the NC Division of Air Quality for an air quality permit for the coal plants and to date, there is not a firm date for the issuance of a draft permit. If a draft permit is issued, there will be a public comment period and given the public interest in the matter, there will be a public hearing on the permit. After the public comment period and hearing, there will be an additional time period in which the Division considers the permit before issuing or denying it. One of the issues is whether the proposed Cliffside units are state of the art or whether newer, more efficient and less polluting technologies are available. If the permit is issued, any aggrieved person could appeal the permit to the Office of Administrative Hearings. Under state law, construction cannot commence until a valid permit is issued. 8. In light of the many initiatives currently underway to develop energy efficiency programs and the sheer cost of the coal units, it is now time for the Commission to postpone its consideration of the public convenience and necessity. This determination cannot be made in isolation, but have as its basis the best data and analysis available. In order to make its decision, the Commission must have before it a full and fair consideration of DSM and efficiency programs before allowing billions of dollars to be committed toward the construction of new large coal units. THEREFORE, NC WARN prays that its motion for postponement be allowed. Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of August,

5 John D. Runkle Attorney at Law P.O. Box 3793 Chapel Hill, N.C (o&f) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that the following persons have been served this MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT BY THE NORTH CAROLINA WASTE AWARENESS AND REDUCTION NETWORK by deposit in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid: Lawrence B. Summers Duke Power Corporation PO Box 1006, EC03T Charlotte, NC Robert W. Kaylor The Kaylor Law Firm 225 Hillsborough Street, Suite 480 Raleigh, NC Antoinette Wike NCUC- Public Staff 4326 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC Ralph McDonald Bailey & Dixon Post Office Box 1351 Raleigh, NC Leonard G. Green N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina James P. West Kevin C. Greene Brandon F. Marzo Troutman Sanders LLP Bank of America Plaza, Suite Peachtree Street, N.E. Atlanta, GA Gary A. Davis & Associates P.O. Box 649 Hot Springs, NC Southern Alliance for Clean Energy c/o Stephen A. Smith 29 North Market Street, Suite 610 Asheville, NC West Law Offices, P.C. Suite 2325, Two Hannover Square 434 Fayettville Street Mall Raleigh, NC Len S. Anthony -5-

6 Kendal C. Bowman Progress Energy Services, Inc. P.O. Box 1551/PEB 17A4 Raleigh, NC Marily Nixon Gudrun Thompson Southern Environmental Law Ctr. 200 W. Franklin St, Ste 330 Chapel Hill, NC Michael S. Colo Poyner & Spruill LLP PO Box 353 Rocky Mount, NC Pamela A. Scott Poyner & Spruill LLP PO Box Raleigh, NC Richard Harkrader NC Sustainable Energy Association PO Box PO Box 6465 Raleigh, NC This is the 21st day of August, 2006 Attorney at Law -6-